Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 5, 2012, 10:56 PM   #551
Quu
macrumors 68000
 
Quu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by turtlez View Post
You can't tell the future and if you have anything to go by look at the iPhone 5 doubling in performance over the S3. Obviously Apple knows what they are doing when they can get a dual core to double a quad core with the A6.
But all they have done is produce a chip based on established ARM designs, tweaked it and put in a GPU made by another company. Then they have Samsung manufacture the chip for them.

And in the benchmarks I've seen the Quad Core Samsung S3 beats the iPhone 5 in some CPU benchmarks but loses miserably on browser performance tests and GPU performance. This isn't such an amazing feat when you consider the A6 is brand new out and the CPU in the S3 is already a year old. The Nexus 4 already beats the iPhone 5's performance and Google is touting it as the fastest phone in the world with regards to processor performance.

The point I was getting at before is Intel is the lead chip designer in the world they have billions of dollars to spend on it and it is almost all they do. Even car manufacturers know you can't design the entire car yourself you use engines and tires from other companies whose business is specific to that task.

Even Apple knows this which is why they've partnered with Motorola, IBM, ARM and Intel for their processors and chipsets over the years.

To be honest I think this rumor is a load of rubbish. Intel's Haswell chips are looking to bring wattage down to under 10 watts next year with performance much higher than any ARM design around. Even something custom made by Apple. And Intel has the benefit of being 64-bit from the start with built in killer graphics.
__________________
Notebook: 17" C2D MBP, 2.93GHz, 4GB RAM, SSD+HDD, Mavericks
Desktop: Three 30", Ci7 3930K, OS X Mavericks, 32GB RAM, 2xGTX780 SLI, 840 Pro SSD
iOS Devices: iPhone 6 64GB | iPad Air 16GB WiFi
Quu is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 10:57 PM   #552
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz View Post
Folks ..there are plenty of people that run Macs and don't give a flying $%^&*( about running Windows.

Business are moving to tablets and even Microsoft is supporting ARM.


X86. Put a fork in it.
That is an extremely early declaration of anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post

There is nothing surprising about Apple having a portable codebase if a bunch of open source hippies can do it.

But ARM ? ARM ? What's the value there ? Performance per watt is no better than Intel. The reason ARM processors are so energy efficient today is because they lack the sheer number crunching capabilities of x86 chips. Intel proved with Medfield that x86 is as power efficient as ARM, if they also sacrifice number crunching. There's even an Android phone that runs on a Medfield SoC!
The ARM kool-aid is always good for page hits.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_elt View Post
Let's look at the bright side tho, at least there will be an easy port for angry birds. ...lol
Bleh people are over birds. Perhaps they should make something with undead goats instead.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 10:59 PM   #553
camomac
macrumors 6502a
 
camomac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Left Coast
I've been thoroughly this before. I bought a top of the line G5 only to have it be a paper weight now. I'm sorry but if apple does this I will really have to rethink apple. I really don't like what they've done with the retina MacBook "pros" and the new iMacs. I really doubt I will give my hard earned money to any company that changes it's architecture every 10 or so years.
camomac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:01 PM   #554
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: HEY!
Quote:
Originally Posted by faroZ06 View Post
VB does not emulate other processor architectures. Sure, they could easily write an ARM version of it, but you would only be able to run Android, Windows RT, and other ARM-supporting systems on it.

Writing a version of VB that emulates other processors would be a whole different project.
I've always been kinda confused by the differences between a VM and an emulator. I guess a VM is an environment speaking the same machine language as the host machine, whereas an emulator can speak and pretend to be whatever it needs to be, provided it has enough processing power to do so, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by subsonix View Post
And it's open source. Let's amuse ourselves and imagine for a second that this rumor is true, then I think it's safe to say that what they use will be equivalent or better than intel's offering, in which case it would not set your computer on fire.
If I'm recalling something I vaguely remember reading a long time ago right, an emulator has to be at least 3 times as powerful as the machine its emulating to work as well as the original hardware, assuming you've got the most efficient coder in the world writing in Assembly. So for an ARM processor to run x86 apps, it'd have to be incredibly efficient, supremely powerful, and likely clocked to currently unheard of speeds to do it well.

They can already emulate a Pentium 1 on an ARM processor, but an iCore? It'll be years before they're able to achieve that.

Last edited by Renzatic; Nov 5, 2012 at 11:09 PM.
Renzatic is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:04 PM   #555
A Hebrew
macrumors 6502a
 
A Hebrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minnesota
Good rumor, I don't think apple has the balls to do this though.
A Hebrew is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:05 PM   #556
winston1236
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: ><
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz View Post
Folks ..there are plenty of people that run Macs and don't give a flying $%^&*( about running Windows.

Business are moving to tablets and even Microsoft is supporting ARM.


X86. Put a fork in it.
Lol businesses are turning to tablets? I work at one of the biggest companies in the world and i have yet to see a single company tablet.
winston1236 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:05 PM   #557
cult hero
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
That'd be my last Mac, for a while at least.

The switch to Intel was one of the best things Apple has done in terms of making their computers really, really useful. Not that they weren't before, but going from PPC to Intel and suddenly having virtualization at my fingertips and the ability to run Windows (if you're a web developer not testing in IE, you don't know what you're doing) made these machines the best all-in-one work machines I've ever owned.

A lot of stuff is coming around with ARM ports (Linux, for example and even Windows) so a switch to ARM in the future might work just fine, but man... in the short term?

No way.

Although I suspect the ARM rumors are going to swim around as long as the Intel ones did. Even if it happens, it seems unlikely to be coming in the very near future.
__________________
Mid 2012 13" MacBook Air, 2.0GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD
iPhone 5s, White, 16GB
cult hero is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:07 PM   #558
hachre
macrumors 6502a
 
hachre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Munich, Germany
I'm excited to buy my next MBP with eight or so iPhone five processors inside.
__________________
13" MacBook Pro Late 2013 (2.4 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD) - iPhone 6+ (Silver, 64 GB)
hachre is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:10 PM   #559
joelypolly
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne & Shanghai
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
That's a nice idea in theory, but as far as I know it'd be impossible to implement in actuality.

The biggest problem is that ARM and x86 speak entirely different languages. What works on one can't work on the other without an emulator or VM mediating. Both of which will consume massive amounts of power just by running.

The other way would be to mode switch between two OSes that are able to talk to the CPU they're designed for. This would be like bootcamping between iOS and OSX really, and isn't all that beneficial for a mobile device. It's alright for tech savvy people, but confusing for the regular folk who want a device that...wait for the cliche...just works.
With hardware abstraction layer such as a hypervisor it should be possible and because Apple builds that OS itself it should be much more consistent experience. Also it is currently possible to have Xcode produce Universal binaries that function with both code paths (this is how debugging iOS applications the Mac current works).

The current gen of Apple design processors such as the A6 is roughly equivalent to an Intel Atom processor. 2 or 3 years down the line it should be consistent with a entry level Core i3 or i5 at least.
__________________
Pentax K5 - DA 16-50 - Sigma HSM 70-200
Pentax 645N - DA 45-85 - DA 200
Ricoh GXR 24-72mm - A12 50mm - M Mount
Flickr|Blog|Website
joelypolly is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:12 PM   #560
Mikey7c8
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quu View Post
To be honest I think this rumor is a load of rubbish. Intel's Haswell chips are looking to bring wattage down to under 10 watts next year with performance much higher than any ARM design around. Even something custom made by Apple. And Intel has the benefit of being 64-bit from the start with built in killer graphics.
I'm not sure that's the point. When you can build something the size of an iPad with a processor/gpu combination that can handle that resolution, pushing a bit further to a Macbook Air enclosure a couple of generations into the future doesn't seem that far fetched.

I don't for one second think it's for everyone, but I can certainly people will find a use for and buy an macbook air based on some future generation of Axx chip with a 20 hour battery life.
Mikey7c8 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:13 PM   #561
JayLenochiniMac
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Sanfrakota
Quote:
Originally Posted by camomac View Post
I've been thoroughly this before. I bought a top of the line G5 only to have it be a paper weight now. I'm sorry but if apple does this I will really have to rethink apple. I really don't like what they've done with the retina MacBook "pros" and the new iMacs. I really doubt I will give my hard earned money to any company that changes it's architecture every 10 or so years.
That's moot anyway. You can't run the latest OS on any macs more than a few years old.
__________________
Home iMac 27" 2.9GHz Intel Core i5
Work iMac 24" 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme
Mobile iPad (4th gen) & iPhone 6
JayLenochiniMac is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:13 PM   #562
dbo43867
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSteve-O View Post
Not again. Remember When you decided to drop Google Maps and make your own? How did that turn out?
Yeah, there's the typical media (negative) hype and a beautiful new maps interface, and they're not looking back.
dbo43867 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:15 PM   #563
scottrichardson
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ulladulla, NSW Australia
What difference does it make? If it's as fast (or faster) when they do it, and it runs OS X and apps, and you get your work and play done, then who cares what hardware is under the hood?
__________________
Mac Pro 8 Core 2.93Ghz 32GB RAM, 2 X SSD 840 PRO 512GB RAID 0, 2 x 24" LED, GTX660 2GB GPU. MacBook Air 13" 2012 i7 2GHz, 256GB SSD, 8GB RAM.
scottrichardson is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:16 PM   #564
chorner
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
Intel already has Xeon motherboards out that support 8 cores per chip, upwards of 16 cores in a dual CPU configuration. Such as the HP Z820, which offers everything you've listed and more, and is readily available for around the same price as the Pro. Well, everything besides Thunderbolt, which makes you wonder why Apple hasn't been putting pressure on Intel to release a pro-line chipset that supports it. I mean it is Apple's baby and all, one of their big selling points. You'd think they'd be doing everything they can to have it included in their top dog machine. Hmm.

The main reason why people aren't buying the Pro now is because they're paying top dollar for hardware that's 3 years out of date. Why pay $2000+ for that, when you can get more up to date hardware for the exact same price?
Wrong again for these reasons:

- there's no native USB3 chipset support on that board you linked
- only (2) native Intel 6Gb/s SATA ports
- again, no Thunderbolt

Apple doesn't like to use 3rd party controllers for essential board-level features like USB and SATA etc. As far as Intel delaying on Thunderbolt, you could ask why they fudged the X79/C600 series chipsets and scaled them back from the original plan - but I doubt they'd answer you

People will buy the MacPro if they require one for their workflow and not wait. It's only those who already have one, or are simply browsing forums like these speculating on releases that will hold off. Professional business and people who rely on these professional machines buy what they need, now, with few exceptions if they happen to know or be tipped off on an 'immediate update' of the lines.

The MacPro available now still has plenty of power available and certainly can hold up until 2013 where it has been stated already from Tim Cook to expect the MacPro (and something 'special') in 2013.
chorner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:20 PM   #565
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: HEY!
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelypolly View Post
Also it is currently possible to have Xcode produce Universal binaries that function with both code paths...
Okay, that's something I didn't know about. Not being a programmer at all, I always assumed you had to compile code to one language or another. If you could make universal binaries, then it could be possible.

...though the OS would have to be able to distinguish between the two, and assign it to the proper processor. So it still wouldn't be easy, I don't think.
Renzatic is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:20 PM   #566
scottrichardson
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ulladulla, NSW Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by hachre View Post
I'm excited to buy my next MBP with eight or so iPhone five processors inside.
Hmm, don't forget your general sense of 'snappiness' is going to come from how fast ONE core is on ONE CPU (unless Apple does some serious work with the OS foundations), and the GPU.

So 8, 24, 100 processors won't make a difference if the base single core is still underpowered compared to current CPU's.
__________________
Mac Pro 8 Core 2.93Ghz 32GB RAM, 2 X SSD 840 PRO 512GB RAID 0, 2 x 24" LED, GTX660 2GB GPU. MacBook Air 13" 2012 i7 2GHz, 256GB SSD, 8GB RAM.
scottrichardson is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:21 PM   #567
Yamcha
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
This is a bit like what Microsoft has done with Microsoft Surface RT, where none of your old x86 applications work..

Which means developers need to start developing for the new ARM processors in order for their applications to run under Windows 8 RT..

That's why I have problem with Apple even considering to adopt these ARM processors..
__________________
iMac 27" | Intel Core i5 3.2GHz | 8GB Memory | 1TB Hard Drive | GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB | OSX Mavericks 10.9.1 | Windows 8.1 64-Bit
Yamcha is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:28 PM   #568
subsonix
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
...though the OS would have to be able to distinguish between the two, and assign it to the proper processor. So it still wouldn't be easy, I don't think.
It's already been done several times, last in the PPC to x86 transition. Mach-O support fat binaries, meaning one executable file can support several architectures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_bin...27s_fat_binary
subsonix is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:29 PM   #569
nuckinfutz
macrumors 603
 
nuckinfutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Middle Earth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamcha View Post
This is a bit like what Microsoft has done with Microsoft Surface RT, where none of your old x86 applications work..

Which means developers need to start developing for the new ARM processors in order for their applications to run under Windows 8 RT..

That's why I have problem with Apple even considering to adopt these ARM processors..
Apple's solution is far better. The code changes needed will be less than the PPC to Intel transition.

Remember. iOS has battle tested most of the large frameworks and most of them already run on ARM and Intel.
nuckinfutz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:30 PM   #570
nsayer
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Intel == legacy

The funny thing about every Intel processor that currently exists is that when you first apply power to them, they start as 8086s. As they boot, they are led by the BIOS through a series of evolutions until they finally arrive as x86_64 class CPUs.

I believe that, at least in their unprotected 32 bit form, the memory maps of all x86 PCs - and even macs - still have memory mapped I/O from 640K to 1M. It's the MMU that makes this "hole" go away for ordinary process space.
nsayer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:31 PM   #571
ThunderSkunk
macrumors 68000
 
ThunderSkunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Durango, Co
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamcha View Post
This is a bit like what Microsoft has done with Microsoft Surface RT, where none of your old x86 applications work..

Which means developers need to start developing for the new ARM processors in order for their applications to run under Windows 8 RT..

That's why I have problem with Apple even considering to adopt these ARM processors..
That's why I don't have an issue with it. We rely on a couple pc-only CAD applications, & the macs ability to run windoze via virtual machine is the only reason we can use Apple computers at all. However, if software vendors are going to be writing all the applications to work on arm for of anyway, & we're told they will, then there's no compatibility consequence if Apple makes the move,
ThunderSkunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:31 PM   #572
dmbfan41
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Apple should know better than to go down this road again. I understand creating their our CPUs for portable devices, but who would ever buy a macbook, macbook pro, mac mini, or mac pro if this were the case? You're basically stuck running OSX just like in the PowerPC days.
dmbfan41 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:32 PM   #573
HurryKayne
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
The day Apple would try to,after great loss in sellings we would see someone to resign.
Maybe we will see some Hybrid Mac like the MacBookAir but seriously i'm not gonna wait that long I WANT MY 680MX IMAC NOW !!!!!
HurryKayne is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:35 PM   #574
faroZ06
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
I've always been kinda confused by the differences between a VM and an emulator. I guess a VM is an environment speaking the same machine language as the host machine, whereas an emulator can speak and pretend to be whatever it needs to be, provided it has enough processing power to do so, right?
According to Wikipedia and the definition I always used, "emulation" is a vague term that just means that it tries to resemble another system. Then I say "processor emulation" if it's actually pretending to be another architecture and "system emulation" if it's something like an x86 Mac running an x86 version of Windows.
faroZ06 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 11:44 PM   #575
SeattleMoose
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Der Wald
No Thanx!!!

Please stop trying to be "an island". You will just end up being bad at a lot of different things. Been there and done that with processor line changes...ugly!!!
SeattleMoose is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tim Cook: Apple 'Spending an Enormous Amount' on 'Macs of the Future' MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 212 Apr 23, 2014 12:04 PM
TSMC Confirms Deal with Apple to Produce A-Series Chips for Future iOS Devices MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 92 Jul 5, 2013 01:27 PM
Xbox One: It is the 'Apple Intel Switch' all over again rjcalifornia Console Games 28 May 22, 2013 12:19 PM
Apple and Intel Have Reportedly Discussed Deal for Production of Future iPhone and iPad Chips MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 128 Mar 20, 2013 08:12 PM
Intel Looking to Cut Power Consumption on Future Ivy Bridge Chips MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 125 Dec 18, 2012 11:18 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC